United Nations to Uruguay

United Nations to Uruguay

The United Nations is the running joke of the international community. Its name is synonymous with global indifference, the absence of moral vision and will, corruption, excessive bureaucratization, and obsessive chattering of world problems without results.

The United Nations cannot stop dictators from invading sovereign states, or sufficiently condemn non-state terrorist groups from declaring de facto war on member states. When genocides take place such as Rwanda in 1994, its top soldier Romeo Dallaire pleads with its top officials for more soldiers, equipment, and support to stop the slaughter of Tutsis and moderate Hutus. He asks for more robust shooting orders against the Interhamwe genocidal militias. Can't do it, they say! Moreover, those officials don't return phone calls because they are like caviar socialists: Too busy talking about changing the world and more interested in eating the best caviar and drinking the most expensive wines. If any other top officials did not return calls on the weekend as little boys and girls were slaughtered under their command, they would be fired and held criminally responsible under a court of law.

We have lowered our expectations for the United Nations so much that its top officials get away with murder, literally speaking. But the United Nations is a reflection of us as an international community. In "A Problem From Hell," Samantha Power competently and sadly shows how the United States, the world guardian of liberal values, stood idly as six genocides took place in the 20th century. The United Nations and the international community have followed this tune of indifference. Moreover, the United Nations participates in charade resolutions that disproportionately target one country, Israel, as the worst outlaw state in human history. Absurd charges of genocide fly at Israel, while real genocides in Darfur (Sudan) are ignored by the massive Arab and Muslim voting bloc at the United Nations.

Admittedly, the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is an independent body with an affiliation to UN member states and the Security Council, represents a hope to punish those responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Yet, numerous great powers such as the United States and China have not signed on, current cases are all in Africa (leading to the suspicion of politicized justice), and powers of enforcement are dependent on national governments that might engage in the crimes. Finally, the ICC cannot prevent genocides and only punish after the crimes were committed. The hope is that the image of major leaders and soldiers behind bars will spur a new global human rights consciousness that attacks the immunity of even the most powerful from committing crimes that "shock the conscience of humanity."

Now, United Nations to Uruguay. Well, here is the connection. Uruguay is a United Nations member. It is a small South American nation in the southeastern part of the continent, bordering only Brazil. It is also next to Argentina, across the Rio de la Plata. It is the second smallest South American country after Suriname. Its population is only about 3.5 million. It is one of the riches countries in the America, one of the most sophisticated in terms of curtailing poverty, fighting corruption, and respecting labour and political rights.

Yet, despite its small size, Uruguay, unlike the United Nations in general, is also a gift to the footballing world. If you can believe it, Uruguay has won two football (soccer) World Cups in 1930 and 1950 respectively. The inaugural World Cup was in Uruguay and the Uruguayans won it by defeating Argentina 4-2. In the 1950 World Cup in Brazil, Uruguay caused the major stir in footballing history. In front of 199,000 fans in the venerated Maracana in Brazil, they fell to Uruguay 2-1. All those that love football understand what this meant: David defeating Goliath on Goliath's home turf. It is the stuff of myths, heroism, and the story of triumph against great odds. It inspires us all.

If tiny Uruguay can win the World Cup and continue to produce glorious footballers from Forlan to Francescoli, then why might we not hope for more from the United Nations? Now we could say let's scrap it all. Get rid of this sclerotic institution. Probably not an option since member states count on the United Nations for their own existence and even legitimization. So radical changes are necessary. A robust, international force that stops genocides when they are occurring. A force that can practicably challenge the genocidal maniacs of our world. If you were in danger of dying in Rwanda or Bosnia-Herzegovina, would you not appreciate a Good Samaritan walking along the road of life helping you? Realpolitik, national interest, and economic and geopolitical considerations often win the day over the Good Samaritan. Yet, by failing to act when we can, is the United Nations and the international community not an accessory to genocide?

Small Uruguay and its football glories represent, for me, all that is beautiful, heroic, mysterious, and hopeful about the world. The United Nations with its massive resources, on the other hand, represents the pole of much with what is wrong with the world: Indifference and the lack of moral clarity. I salute Uruguay, or the Eastern Republic of Uruguay in its full incarnation, because it represents what US President Obama would call the "audacity of hope" in a world rife with hopelessness and indifference. I salute Uruguay for its stunning national motto "Liberty or Death!" Now my hope is that Uruguay returns to the glories of its footballing past and wins a third World Cup!

Tamir Bar-On